I agree in that both plotlines are fine, but "The Cure" just feels out of place as part of the conclusion to the trilogy. Like I said earlier, Phoenix demanded the full attention of the film, and rightfully so, because it's both a huge and phenomenal story arc that was just utterly wasted. "The Cure" needed to be saved for a potential future film, if it was going to be used at all.

And yes, in all fairness, a 2.5 hour runtime may have solved quite a bit of the problems that exist, but I still think what I said above is more ideal to finish the trilogy. More time certainly would have helped make those plot details work much better in context, but I still think they're both piss poor characterizations. Cyclops should not die so easily. I get that Wolverine is the so-called main character of the movie, but Cyclops should be a huge part of the Phoenix saga, even with the love triangle Singer developed right off the bat. Also, Rogue taking the cure is such a cop out. It's the antithesis to the entire story arc that Singer built around her being able to accept her powers.

A much better movie? Yes.

What it should have been with Singer's continued development? Hell no.

I agree. The cure would have been better in another film, especially if it had come about as the human reaction to Phoenix. One out of control mutant results in humans wanting every mutant to be cured.

Cyclops should have been central to the Phoenix plot, nobody could argue that, but unfortunately factors got in the way and it wasn't to be. His death could have still worked within the story, unfortunately this just didn't have the impact it should've and this was all due to runtime and bad writing.

Rogue should have really agonised over whether taking the cure or not. The reasons why she would take it are completely understandable, (if she ever wanted to have kids, she would need to touch someone long enough to do the deed, etc) However, they explored none of the rammifications of what would be a life changing decision. In a way, like you said, it is a cop out. Rogue is one of my favourite characters, but the way she was handled in X3 was awful. She should have been a central character to deal with the cure storyline and she wasn't. The Phoenix plot and the Cure plot felt like separate plotlines put into the same movie, they should have either been better entwined together or, like you said, put into separate movies.

__________________Madness, as you know, is like gravity. All it takesisA Little Push.

I agree. The cure would have been better in another film, especially if it had come about as the human reaction to Phoenix. One out of control mutant results in humans wanting every mutant to be cured.

Cyclops should have been central to the Phoenix plot, nobody could argue that, but unfortunately factors got in the way and it wasn't to be. His death could have still worked within the story, unfortunately this just didn't have the impact it should've and this was all due to runtime and bad writing.

Rogue should have really agonised over whether taking the cure or not. The reasons why she would take it are completely understandable, (if she ever wanted to have kids, she would need to touch someone long enough to do the deed, etc) However, they explored none of the rammifications of what would be a life changing decision. In a way, like you said, it is a cop out. Rogue is one of my favourite characters, but the way she was handled in X3 was awful. She should have been a central character to deal with the cure storyline and she wasn't. The Phoenix plot and the Cure plot felt like separate plotlines put into the same movie, they should have either been better entwined together or, like you said, put into separate movies.

I really like the idea of the Cure being a human reaction to the Phoenix saga. I think both X3 and a potential X4 could have been very tightly focused movies that would excel as a result. I think you could even get away with Sentinels in this X4, as part of the human reaction to Phoenix.

Cyclops has really gotten the shaft the entire trilogy, and it just seemed like he was poised to be a major focus for the third entry in the franchise, but was just written out because Wolverine became the focus. Does anyone have any idea if there was any truth to Cyclops being written out of the script as a result of Marsden signing onto Returns? I recall rumors, but it sounds like a fanboy explanation for his poor characterization to me.

I agree that the decision should've been a major struggle. I also think the decision to take the cure is just bad characterization. You're right, she should be a major part of the Cure storyline since her powers are so potentially detrimental to living an ideal life. Just wasted potential, like everything else in that damn film.

Sigh. I know what I'll be doing if I ever invent a time machine or befriend a crazy old doctor.

No, they didn't do that. That would never happen with any movie. They didn't 'ask' for feedback but when the first designs leaked out, reaction on forums such as this showed that most people didn't like them.

This seems so funny to me because the second design recieved just as much hate if not more. Especially on the KMC forums. Seems like to me they just went with something that was cheaper to pull off because people would have complained either way.

This seems so funny to me because the second design recieved just as much hate if not more. Especially on the KMC forums. Seems like to me they just went with something that was cheaper to pull off because people would have complained either way.

It seems they went back to more classic comic book designs for Juggs and Beast after Vaughn left, and a magazine article mentions that they changed the Juggs look because fans didn't like it.

The problem is that listening to hardcore fanboys can be a dangerous thing.

It seems they went back to more classic comic book designs for Juggs and Beast after Vaughn left, and a magazine article mentions that they changed the Juggs look because fans didn't like it.

The problem is that listening to hardcore fanboys can be a dangerous thing.

On page one S.Grundy said they where going for the Ultimate Juggernaut look. The magazine said where going for the classic look. I say whatever they where going for they failed at both. I mean nothing about that yells anything significant about the Juggernaut to me.

The fans ***** about everything from everyfilm so I don't see why Juggs would be such a huge exception. Unless they totally ignore us for the most part and took one exception to heart.
Listening to fanboys can be dangerous,I agree. But then again listening to anyone can be dangerous.

Yeah, I can't blame him for being bitter, but he deserves much of the blame nonetheless. It's not like this film is a simple blip on his directing career. Essentially everything he's churned out has been pretty bad (although I personally think Red Dragon is fine). I understand that circumstances for the film were far from ideal, but I think he would be more accepting of that instead of just strictly saying he wouldn't change a thing.

However, that all being said, now that I reflect more upon it, I think a lot of the fault lies with Penn and Kinberg, because the script was likely subpar to begin with. And matters just got worse when they lied to fans about various things. The whole thing was just a troubled production from the moment Singer jumped ship.

I know this is an old ass thread, but I just stumbled upon it.

I agree with this thread.

My main blame for this film goes to Kinberg and Penn. They are the ones who wrote all the bull crap stuff that happens in the film.

My next blame, not as much but still blame, goes to Matthew Vaughn, because a lot of the problems with the script came from his involvement on it.

Ratner came in late to the game, and his only real creative change was moving the Golden Gate Bridge sequence from Act 2 to the climax. A lot of Vaughn's horrid ideas were taken out of the script.

I do put blame on Ratner for the pacing of certain scenes. The greatness in X-Men, X2, and now X-Men: First Class lay in the depth of heart they have in them. X-Men: The Last Stand has some really good moments, but they are just that; moments.

Ratner went for the more kinetic, energetic pace, and in some ways I think it worked better than Singer's films, but at times, it didn't, and the movie didn't get a chance to breathe.

Overall, I agree with the Ratner interview. I don't think that the movie is nearly as bad as fans make it out to be. I think they are overly bitter because of things like Cyclops dying, Xavier dying, and Rogue being cured. I agree, I hate those things too, but outside of that, and a few minor things here or there, the movie really isn't that bad at all.

There are movies that I watch and I think "yup this movie is bad but I still enjoy it anyways", but when I watch X-Men: The Last Stand (and even X-Men Origins: Wolverine) my thought is "what -exactly- is the problem here? Because it's really not that bad"

I really like the idea of the Cure being a human reaction to the Phoenix saga. I think both X3 and a potential X4 could have been very tightly focused movies that would excel as a result. I think you could even get away with Sentinels in this X4, as part of the human reaction to Phoenix.

Cyclops has really gotten the shaft the entire trilogy, and it just seemed like he was poised to be a major focus for the third entry in the franchise, but was just written out because Wolverine became the focus. Does anyone have any idea if there was any truth to Cyclops being written out of the script as a result of Marsden signing onto Returns? I recall rumors, but it sounds like a fanboy explanation for his poor characterization to me.

I agree that the decision should've been a major struggle. I also think the decision to take the cure is just bad characterization. You're right, she should be a major part of the Cure storyline since her powers are so potentially detrimental to living an ideal life. Just wasted potential, like everything else in that damn film.

Sigh. I know what I'll be doing if I ever invent a time machine or befriend a crazy old doctor.

As I recall, it all stemmed from the fact that Marsden had signed on to film Superman Returns and had a scheduling conflict, and it was Simon Kinberg who came out and stated "We've come up with a brilliant way to deal with Marsden's absence and write Cyclops out" (paraphrase)

The whole "Fox wanted to punish Marsden for going to Warner" was the fanboy bitterness.

Fact is, even though the fanbase thinks that Singer's X3 would have been perfection (and it very well may have been), Singer walked, and he took his treatment with him. So NOBODY had anything from Singer to work with. In their defense, Kinberg and Penn (and Vaughn) had to write their script from scratch. Between the 3 of them, there were some really horrid ideas. Thankfully, a lot of them didn't make the cut. And unfortunately, some of them did. Like Cyclops dying.

Kinberg, Penn, and Ratner did get some pretty good stuff on the film too. I love the movie and in many ways think it's the best of the series, so they did something right. But the movie also did the most wrong. And unfortunately a lot of what was wrong was due to Singer leaving, Singer taking one of the essential actors from the movie (not saying Singer was wrong in doing so, but it did cause a negative impact on X-Men), and a bunch of "creative" minds who couldn't adequately overcome the obstacles put in front of them.

I watched it again recently and it's an entertaining movie for sure, it just wasn't at the level of quality as the first two films for me. However, in a lot of ways it feels more like what an X-Men movie should feel like than the first two films. It's just too bad that it was mostly production issues that decided the fates and the increased/decreased focus of some of the characters in the movie rather than creative choices.

X3 just didn't handle the characters pretty well and hello Mystique, Cyclops, Rogue and Professor X didn't reach the climax! Angel and Colossus were underused. The look of Callisto and Juggernaut are totally different in the comics, etc..

I think X3 would have been stronger if the characters,who were supposed to drive the plot, Jean & Angel had better origins...Annie's death is an important part of Jean's backstory, they could've used that as the trigger of Jean's latent telepathy/telekinetic powers emerging and the trauma of Annie's death was to much for her + she kept "hearing" other's thoughts which would've led to the "Phoenix" persona manifesting....For Angel, he should've been a former member of the team, who left the school upon "graduating" it would've made his return to the mansion more heartfelt.

X3 just didn't handle the characters pretty well and hello Mystique, Cyclops, Rogue and Professor X didn't reach the climax! Angel and Colossus were underused. The look of Callisto and Juggernaut are totally different in the comics, etc..

I love all 5 films and think they each have their own charms and hindrances...

...as far as Callisto, I liked the look but always thought...they couldn't work a patch in...

...I agree with Juggernaut, and would like to add Collossus to that list, his metal appearance was a downgrade from X2.

I wish Angel and Rogue saw some action in X3 (at least Rogue willingly using her powers, not just Collossus touching her to trigger them), but they were more used to move the Cure story...even then I still think their was a lot more both could have contributed to the Cure plot...

I remember when hearing Moira and Kavita Rao were in X3 I was hoping for a scene of the two going over whether a cure is needed or not...

X-MEN 3 was cool. X-men origins was cool.
I enjoyed both.
But really, i enjoyed them just for seeing some of my favourite characters, even if they were destroyed.
Other than that, they weren't good movies. It was just cool to see all these characters on screen.
however, they could have done this much much much better